Yellowstone Grizzly Bear Threats Underestimated

In the November 23rd Salt Lake Tribune article "Yellowstone grizzly deaths down: future uncertain," statements by government officials dismissed the massive threats to whitebark pine trees, the primary engine driving the health of Yellowstone's grizzly bear population. The impacts of declining whitebark pine on Yellowstone's grizzlies were at the heart of U.S. District Judge Donald Molloy's September ruling that restored endangered species protections to Yellowstone grizzlies.

The Yellowstone grizzly's heavy dependence on whitebark pine seeds is unique among the world's grizzly bears. Yet since around 2001, warming temperatures at high elevations have sparked an unprecedented pine beetle outbreak that has killed much of Yellowstone's whitebark pine forests — forests that did not co-evolve with pine beetles. Leading experts predict the functional extinction of whitebark pine in the Greater Yellowstone Ecosystem in 5 to 7 years.

Although Yellowstone grizzlies are omnivores, it is this tiny, fatty seed of the whitebark pine, conveniently cached by the red squirrel, that drives grizzly bear reproductive success. And, just as important, by keeping bears foraging in remote, high places, whitebark pine cone crops reduce human-bear conflicts and excessive grizzly bear mortalities.

Consistent with the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service's (FWS) defense of its decision to delist Yellowstone grizzlies in 2007, FWS Grizzly Recovery Coordinator Chris Servheen is quoted, saying that the threats to whitebark pine "had been overstated" and "bears could adapt." But FWS has shown no evidence that Yellowstone grizzlies can find alternative foods that will replace the rich whitebark pine seeds that provide needed calories before hibernation.

FWS' conclusions are contradicted by 30 years of scientific research. For example, a 2005 Interagency Grizzly Bear report stated that "should whitebark pine decline rapidly, we speculate that we would witness a scenario similar to what occurred when dumps were closed in Yellowstone National Park: more management problems... with a substantial increase in measurable bear mortality." And, in 1999, U.S. Geologic Survey scientist Dr. David Mattson found that "declines in abundance of critical high quality foods will precipitate...declines in lifetime reproduction of females with potentially major related declines in densities."

In attempting to justify its claim that grizzlies can adapt to other foods without negative consequences, FWS cited only one scientific source in its delisting decision. This paper, however, actually supported the opposite point: "in years of poor pine seed production, bears respond by substituting low-quality foods...and experience a substantial increased risk of direct human-caused mortality due to their movement into more populated areas." The court record fully supports Judge Molloy's conclusion that there was a "disconnect between the science and FWS' conclusions."

With the collapse of whitebark pine and high grizzly mortality levels over the last six years, there is no rational justification for Grizzly Bear Study Team Director Chuck Schwartz's quote: "last year was just one of those bad years, and it looks like the good years are coming back." Reality is that allowable mortality limits have been violated in 4 of the last 5 years — and we are one bear away from breaching these limits this year as well.

It is critical that all involved with Yellowstone grizzly recovery efforts immediately acknowledge the collapse of whitebark pine and its implications for Yellowstone's grizzlies. We must also redouble our efforts to save one of the most treasured icons of the Greater Yellowstone Ecosystem. To compensate for whitebark pine loss, this means expanding the areas where grizzlies are allowed to live, and increasing efforts to reduce bear mortalities — as well as creating an honest dialogue with all concerned about how to ensure a healthy future for the Great Bear.